Characteristics of international medical graduates who applied to the CaRMS 2002 match.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: International medical graduates are an important component of the Canadian physician workforce. For most international medical graduates, the principal route to obtaining a residency position in Canada is to apply through the second iteration of the Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS) match. In order to help inform the work toward integrating unlicensed international medical graduates into Canada's health professional workforce, our objectives were to describe the demographic and educational characteristics of international medical graduate CaRMS applicants and identify their preferred clinical disciplines and practice locations. METHODS: A 37-item Web-based questionnaire survey was offered to all 659 international medical graduate second-iteration CaRMS 2002 applicants. We collected data on their demographic and educational background and preferred clinical discipline and practice location. Up to 2 follow-up email reminders were sent to nonrespondents. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 70.3% (463/659). Of the respondents, 71.9% had obtained their medical degree in Asia, the Middle East or Eastern Europe: 36.5% had graduated with a medical degree since 1994, and 17.3% since 1997. Most respondents (74.3%) were aged between 30 and 44 years. More than half (54.6%) had completed their medical education in English. Most (69.3%) had done postgraduate training outside Canada. Before coming to Canada, 42.8% had practised medicine for 1-5 years and 45.6% had practised for 6-20 years. The top 5 choices of clinical discipline in Canada were family medicine/general practice (45.6%), internal medicine (14.9%), surgery (7.3%), obstetrics/gynecology (6.7%) and pediatrics (4.8%). Of those who resided in the 4 Western provinces or Nova Scotia, between 76.8% and 86.7% preferred to stay in their own province, and 60%, 51.4% and 37% of those who resided in Newfoundland, Ontario or Quebec respectively preferred to practise in their own province. INTERPRETATION: Second-iteration international medical graduate CaRMS applicants are a heterogeneous group of physicians, some with substantial medical training and experience and others at an earlier stage of their medical career.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».